The news “hook” for Wafa’s unfortunately rare appearance was the recent alleged rape of a Libyan woman, Iman Al-Obeidi by Qadaffi’s minions.

As a working physician in her native Syria, Wafa noted that she was familiar with “many such crimes” committed with the sanction of Sharia—Islamic Law. She elaborated that under Sharia,

Any sexual activity is considered the given right of a male…A Muslim woman cannot report being raped because she will be asked to provide four witnesses otherwise she will be accused of committing adultery, and she will be stoned to death.

The scholar Ibn Warraq affirms this “iniquitous situation.” He notes that Koran 24.4 states: “And those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterward) accept their testimony – They indeed are evil-doers.” But Warraq elaborates how this injunction renders women defenseless under misogynistic Islamic Law, past and present:

Muslim jurists will only accept four male witnesses. These witnesses must declare that they have “seen the parties in the very act of carnal conjunction.” Once an accusation of fornication and adultery has been made, the accuser himself or herself risks punishment if he or she does not furnish the necessary legal proofs. Witnesses are in the same situation. If a man were to break into a woman’s dormitory and rape half a dozen women, he would risk nothing since there would be no male witnesses. Indeed the victim of a rape would hesitate before going in front of the law, since she would risk being condemned herself and have little chance of obtaining justice. “If the woman’s words were sufficient in such cases,” explains Judge Zharoor ul Haq of Pakistan, “then no man would be safe.”

I find it hard to believe that the prophet Muhammad would preach a doctrine where any woman can be abused at any time by any Muslim man and be held not accountable.
And Wafa replied, appropriately

You need to get familiar with Muhammad’s life and how he treated women in his life…Don’t forget, Muhammad is the role model for every Muslim man.

Notwithstanding the predictable American Muslim Brotherhood taqiyya O’Reilly is likely to air in the coming days as a “fair and balanced” riposte to Wafa’s irrefragable presentation, some salient details merit review.

What was Muhammad’s “perfect” role model? And what do Islam’s canonical texts, especially the Koran and the hadith (Muhammad’s “guiding” words and deeds as recorded by his pious Muslim companions), opine on these matters?

Using the Koranic “revelation” as justification, Muhammad insists that he is entitled, not simply his own wives, but those captured in battle, and cousins as well, as per Allah’s grant in Koran 33:50.

O Prophet, We have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughters of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively, apart from the believers — We know what We have imposed upon them touching their wives and what their right hands own — that there may be no fault in thee; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

Koran 4:24 extends the “privilege” of having sexual intercourse with captured slave women to all Muslim men.

For example, Muhammad and his minions attacked and subdued the prosperous Jewish tribe Banu-Mustaliq in a surprise raid (during 626 A.D.). The Banu al-Mustaliq males were slaughtered and the “booty” included the victims’ women. Juwayriyya, the most beautiful captive and daughter of the leader of the Banu al-Mustaliq was taken as a “bride” for Muhammad himself. The mass rape by “coitus interruptus” of the captured women—as sanctioned by Muhammad—was described in a canonical hadith, thusly:

(Sunan Abu Dawud 2167)—Muhairiz said: I entered the mosque and saw Abu Sa’id al-Khudri. I sat with him and asked about withdrawing the penis (while having intercourse). Abu Sa’id said: We went out with the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to Banu al-Mustaliq, and took some Arab women captive, and we desired the women, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, and we wanted ransom; so we intended to withdraw the penis (while having intercourse with the slave-women). But we asked ourselves: Can we draw the penis when the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) is among us before asking him about it? So we asked him about it. He said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”

Moreover, according to modern Western law (for example this Canadian law), statutory rape is sexual intercourse with anyone under the age of 14 — a punishable offense unless both parties are aged within two years of each other, or the accused is aged 12 to 13. Here is how the two most important canonical hadith collections describe Muhammad’s “relationship” with Aisha — their “marriage contract” and its sexual consummation — when the Muslim prophet was some four decades older than his child bride (aged 6-7 at the time of her “marriage”):

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311: Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88: Narrated Ursa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151: Narrated Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, who had not yet reached the age of puberty.)
Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 5981: Aisha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her.

The ugly living legacy of such pedophilia persists in Islamic communities across the globe from Yemen, to Afghanistan—to Britain. Here is a description of the modern horrors, including rape, engendered by Muhammad’s “sacralized” example from a contemporary female Muslim child “bride” living in the West—in London:

“I told them I was terrified and desperate, that I was just a child and far too young to get married. I pleaded with them to help me escape, but no one saw anything wrong in what was happening. I begged my husband not to marry me, but he told me I had no choice.” Despite being two years below the British age of consent, Ayse was moved into her cousin’s family home, where she lived openly as his wife in the local Kurdish Turkish community. “I was all alone in a foreign country, unable to speak the language,” she said. “I was trapped. Until I escaped, I didn’t even realize that marrying at 14 wasn’t legal in Britain: everyone I knew in London regarded it as normal.” In the two years before she reached 16, the sex Ayse was coerced into having with her cousin was statutory rape. “It was disgusting, awful,” she said. “I used to scream and cry all night. I was too young, too tender. It killed me inside. Life became meaningless.”

Of course since Koran 2:223 states that women are “tilth” to be “cultivated” (or “plowed”) as men please, contemporary mainstream, institutional Islam sanctions marital rape. As reported in the UK Independent (10/14/10), president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, affirmed this view during March, 2010 interview. Sheikh Sayeed was in fact responding to an inchoate effort at modernizing the contracts which govern Muslim marriages in Britain. The good Sheikh, representing Britain’s main Islamic Sharia court, the Islamic Sharia Council, promptly published a rebuttal of the contract, which included a statement on sexual abuse (page 6 here). He opined in the March interview:

Clearly there cannot be any “rape” within the marriage. Maybe “aggression”, maybe “indecent activity.”

He further rejected both the characterization of non-consensual marital sex as rape, and the prosecution of such offenders as “not Islamic.” Sheikh Sayeed, who came to Britain from Bangladesh in 1977, also brazenly expressed his Sharia-supremacism and accompanying disdain for Western, i.e., British Law, stating

…to make it exactly as the Western culture demands is as if we are compromising Islamic religion with secular non-Islamic values.

Sayeed re-affirmed these sentiments to The UK Independent:

In Islamic sharia, rape is adultery by force. So long as the woman is his wife, it cannot be termed as rape.

Crowing with pride during his March 2010 interview, Sheikh Sayeed maintained,

No other sharia council can claim they are so diverse as ours because other sharia councils, they are following one school of fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence]. Ours is diverse –we are hanafi, shafi’i, hanbali.we have Bangladeshi…we have Pakistani, we have Indian, we have Palestinian, we have Somali scholars on our board.

At present there are 16 main sharia courts around Britain, located in Birmingham, Bradford, and Ealing in West London. These institutions are “complemented” by more informal sharia-based tribunals—the think tank Civitas asserting that up to 85 tribunals currently exist in Britain.

But for those like Bill O’Reilly who naively—and smugly—proclaim such phenomena are absent within the Muslim communities of North America, consider AMJA, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America. AMJA’s mission statement claims the organization was, “…founded to provide guidance for Muslims living in North America…AMJA is a religious organization that does not exploit religion to achieve any political ends, but instead provides practical solutions within the guidelines of Islam and the nation’s laws to the various challenges experienced by Muslim communities.”

In response to the specific query, “Is there a such thing as Marital Rape?,” the AMJA issued fatwa #2982:

In the name of Allah, all praise is for Allah, and may peace and blessing be upon the Messenger of Allah and his family. To proceed:

For a wife to abandon the bed of her husband without excuse is haram [forbidden]. It is one of the major sins and the angels curse her until the morning as we have been informed by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). She is considered nashiz (rebellious) under these circumstances. As for the issue of forcing a wife to have sex, if she refuses, this would not be called rape, even though it goes against natural instincts and destroys love and mercy, and there is a great sin upon the wife who refuses; and Allah Almighty is more exalted and more knowledgeable.

An ocean apart from Britain—now a recognized Western hotbed for “Islamic fundamentalism”—the same Sharia-sanctioned misogynistic bigotry prevails in a North American clerical organization openly advising US and Canadian Muslims.

Like this:

Recall the euphoria that surrounded Barack Obama during the 2008 election season and after he was inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States. Life was going to be blue skies and rainbows, or at least we were told, with hope and change on the way. The American people would be better off and so would our nation with Obama in control. After a little more than two years as the President, those blue skies have turned gray with not the slightest hint of a rainbow.
Some professed that with Barack Obama as President, the staples of life would become affordable if not altogether free. Surely you remember Peggy Joseph who said, at a Barack Obama campaign event in August 2008, that she would not have to worry about paying for her gas and mortgage. Consider what has happened to those staples of life during the Obama presidency.
As of March 14, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline was $3.57/gallon. When Obama took office in January 2009, the price was $1.81/gallon. That represents more than a 90% increase in just over two years…….(Con’t)

[THESE ARE THE EVIL PIGS THAT OBAMA, SOROS, HILLARY, AYERS, CODE PINK AND THE REST OF THIS HORRID REGIME ARE AIDING, ABETTING, STANDING WITH AND SUPPORTING. NICE WORK, YOU EVIL, ROTTEN JIHADI SWINE.]

Hat-Tip SaratogaAnn

23 March 2011

Amnesty International has today called on the Egyptian authorities to investigate serious allegations of torture, including forced ‘virginity tests’, inflicted by the army on women protesters arrested in Tahrir Square earlier this month.

After army officers violently cleared the square of protesters on 9 March, at least 18 women were held in military detention. Amnesty International has been told by women protesters that they were beaten, given electric shocks, subjected to strip searches while being photographed by male soldiers, then forced to submit to ‘virginity checks’ and threatened with prostitution charges.

‘Virginity tests’ are a form of torture when they are forced or coerced.

“Forcing women to have ‘virginity tests’ is utterly unacceptable. Its purpose is to degrade women because they are women,” said Amnesty International. “All members of the medical profession must refuse to take part in such so-called ‘tests’.”

20-year-old Salwa Hosseini told Amnesty International that after she was arrested and taken to a military prison in Heikstep, she was made, with the other women, to take off all her clothes to be searched by a female prison guard, in a room with two open doors and a window. During the strip search, Salwa Hosseini said male soldiers were looking into the room and taking pictures of the naked women. ……(CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE FROM AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL.)

Like this:

Proof that you don’t have to live in New York or Hollywood to be a left-wing knothead was the decision by a Chicago high school to boycott a basketball tournament in Arizona because someone — the principal perhaps — opposed Arizona’s immigration policy. A policy, as we all know, that is the mirror image of federal law. Then, having shown the world what they think of those racists in Arizona, they went off to play an exhibition game in a country that serves as a role model for freedom-loving people everywhere . . . China!

Leftists like to think of themselves as clear-thinking realists who are sensitive to nuance and irony. In reality, they are like little children who regard fairy tales as non-fiction. For instance, they champion socialism even though the past hundred years have proven time and again that it doesn’t work in practice the way it does in theory. On the contrary, in every country where it has existed, it has inevitably led to loss of liberty, widespread poverty and mass murder on a scale that has no parallel in human history. Point out this obvious fact to a liberal, and once he gets done calling you a greedy, heartless, bloodthirsty reactionary, he’ll insist that we haven’t yet seen true socialism. Actually, we have. We’ve seen it in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, in China, Cambodia, North Korea and Cuba.

The reason that capitalism works and socialism doesn’t is because, unlike the former, the latter doesn’t factor in human nature. Most people want to compete — whether it’s for status, glory or riches — and they want for themselves and their children the opportunity to excel to the best of their ability…..(Con’t)

Like this:

[This is VERY bad news, folks. I wonder how many of these illegal aliens are muzzies. And by the way…… people caught sneaking into this country illegally are NOT “immigrants”. They are CRIMINALS. ]

Clad in U.S. Marine uniforms, the illegal immigrants were apprehended at the Campo Border Patrol Westbound I-8 checkpoint at 11 p.m. on March 14 near Pine Valley, Calif., according to a March 15 report by California’s El Centro Border Intelligence Center.

Officials at U.S. Customs and Border Protection are investigating a report that 13 illegal immigrants who were disguised as U.S. Marines were apprehended in a fake military van last week.

Clad in U.S. Marine uniforms, the illegal immigrants were apprehended at the Campo Border Patrol Westbound I-8 checkpoint at 11 p.m. on March 14 near Pine Valley, Calif., according to information received by California’s El Centro Border Intelligence Center.

After the suspicious white van was subjected to secondary inspection, it was determined that the driver of the vehicle and its front seat passenger were U.S. citizens who were attempting to smuggle 13 illegal immigrants into the United States. All of the vehicle’s occupants wore U.S. Marine uniforms, reportedly emblazoned with the name “Perez.”

The van used in the smuggling attempt, according to the report, was a privately owned vehicle registered out of Yucca Valley, Calif., and was bearing stolen government plates that had been defaced. The center digit — 0 — was altered to read as an 8. Further research through multiple government agencies determined that the plate belonged to a one-ton cargo van registered to the U.S. Marine Corps.

“Agents are reminded to remain vigilant for new smuggling trends,” the report concludes.

CBP spokesman Michael Friel told FoxNews.com that the agency was investigating the report. A call seeking comment from Department of Defense officials was not immediately returned.

Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Steven Pitts, a spokesman for CBP’s San Diego sector, confirmed to Homeland Security Today “that [the apprehensions] did occur” and that the 11 undocumented aliens had been processed for deportation.

A total of three U.S. citizens were processed on “alien smuggling charges,” Pitts told the website. The original report, however, cited two U.S. citizens.

Pitts told the website that the San Diego Naval Criminal Investigative Service’s Southwest Field Office has taken the lead in investigating the incident. An investigation is ongoing, Pitts said, adding that federal charges related to the allegedly stolen vehicle could be added later.

After stopping the van, CBP agents determined that none of the van’s occupants possessed military identification cards and each U.S. Marine uniform bore the name “Perez,” Homeland Security Today reports.

The van entered into the United States via Mexicali, Mexico, and proceeded to Calexico, Calif., where the U.S. Marine uniforms were donned, according to Homeland Security Today.

The Campo Border Station was constructed in June 2008 and is located roughly 28 miles east of San Diego Sector Headquarters in rural East San Diego County. It is responsible for securing approximately 13.1 linear miles of the U.S.-Mexico border and 417 square miles of surrounding territory. An estimated 7,000 vehicles pass through its two checkpoints daily, according to its website.